Height of balustrade across patio doors onto flat roof

Joined
27 Dec 2009
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Location
London
Country
United Kingdom
Hi,

To prevent access onto a flat roof (and to prevent use of it as a terrace), our planning permission requires us to have a physical barrier across the patio doors that we're going to install. What height do the BC regulations require in this case?

The part K document only specifies barrier heights of 900mm for internal, and 1100 for external. While this is obviously external access, there's no void directly the other side of the barrier to topple into, so do the same rules apply as say a Juliette balcony?

Thanks all!
 
Sponsored Links
i would assume it has to be the same height regardless if its any lower it will still allow access to an unguarded edge as in iff you had a 900/1100/ barrier around the roof then its a safe area as far as falling off is concerned
as you haven't you front line off defence is your primary barrier so has to be that high

and no need to thank me lol :LOL:
 
i would assume it has to be the same height regardless if its any lower it will still allow access to an unguarded edge as in iff you had a 900/1100/ barrier around the roof then its a safe area as far as falling off is concerned
as you haven't you front line off defence is your primary barrier so has to be that high

and no need to thank me lol :LOL:

Well, if you insist ... :D (Edit: just got the joke - doh, bit slow today)

One thing that confuses me about the BC thinking - if it was a window rather than doors, would it need any guarding at all? Surely in that case the cill could be much lower, and present a much bigger, 'real world' risk.

Thanks again (couldn't help myself!)
 
Aye as big-conk says, in a roundabout fashion, planning aside, ultimately it is providing a barrier preventing people falling off a flat roof.
 
Sponsored Links
Thanks again both. Just to double check then - this presumably has to be at the 1100 height for an external barrier? Or do you think there'd be an leeway/argument to make it at the lower 900 mm height - the reason I'm asking is it'll be an awful lot easier with the latter as it would below the height of the handles and locks.

For complicated reasons, we're having to put the balustrade on the *inside* - sounds a bif naff, I know, but we're going to minimise the impact by using a single sheet of glass with no rail - it'll be about 2300 mm wide.

We've looked at toughened glass (£££), so now are looking at polycarb/acrylic - at about £220 for 12 mm thick it's a lot cheaper . Scratch issues aside, how do I figure out the thickness of acrylic I'd need to pass the horizontal load tests, assuming it had no framing/rail, and was only secured at the vertical edges (by D clamp type fittings) - would 12 or even 10 mm likely be rigid enough?

Or is the above 'crazy talk' ?

Cheers.
 
For complicated reasons, we're having to put the balustrade on the *inside* - sounds a bif naff, I know, but we're going to minimise the impact by using a single sheet of glass with no rail - it'll be about 2300 mm wide.
Inside! Are you serious! That sounds awful! Why don't you have a word wth your Inspector when you get your inspections underway with regards to the height, see what they say!

The suppliers of your glass or acrylic will determine the thickness you require.
 
if you do go for 900 aim for around 925-950 then you have a bit off leeway for mistakes and floor coverings ;)
 
Just an update to an old thread, but I finally got moving on this and had the BC round. Just as suggested he was happy to let the barrier be a biT lower (about 950 though we didn't measure it) to avoid locks and handles. So thanks for all the advice everyone!

While researching this to argue my case, I came across this example - here Chelsea BC were happy to sign off a 740mm barrier (!) because it was a metre away from the edge (item 2.9 if you read it). I wouldn't fancy something so low, but thought it might be useful ammo for someone to reference in the future.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...xOTpDQ&usg=AFQjCNFAVmltUTxtGwwq1jZ9IlNfTox3XA
 
exellent thanks for the feedback we really appreciate you taking the time to let us know how you got on :D
 
While researching this to argue my case, I came across this example - here Chelsea BC were happy to sign off a 740mm barrier (!) because it was a metre away from the edge (item 2.9 if you read it). I wouldn't fancy something so low, but thought it might be useful ammo for someone to reference in the future.
That's not relevant here, on the example you cite they a) had to keep the handrails that height to match the existing terrace and b) there was a flat roof immediately beneath the barrier.
 
Condition b) holds in my case (it was what started my whole line of questioning ) - read my original post again. And why would BC care about a) - isn't that a planning issue?

Anyway as said, I'm all happy so this was only to help others in the future who might run into the same question

Thanks again.
 
Oh yea OK fair play condition b does apply indeed, well its hot here and I can't be bothered to read the whole thread! :oops:
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top